{"id":1884,"date":"2010-06-11T05:54:55","date_gmt":"2010-06-11T05:54:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/2010\/06\/can-craig-venter%e2%80%99s-synthetic-life-accelerate-algae-fuels.html"},"modified":"2010-06-11T05:54:55","modified_gmt":"2010-06-11T05:54:55","slug":"can-craig-venter%e2%80%99s-synthetic-life-accelerate-algae-fuels","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/2010\/06\/can-craig-venter%e2%80%99s-synthetic-life-accelerate-algae-fuels.html","title":{"rendered":"Can Craig Venter\u2019s Synthetic Life Accelerate Algae Fuels?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The last ten days have been hectic for those in  the genetic engineering field. Synthetic life has been created, scream the  headlines, and well, it is no hoax, at least not entirely.<\/p>\n<p>The man at the center of it all, Craig Venter,  is no stranger to those in the field of biotech, having been associated earlier  with mapping the human gene.<\/p>\n<p>Such a breathtaking announcement is not just of  academic interest to us at Oilgae, because Venter has reportedly mentioned that  the first real-world use to which he plans to try his synthetic life creation  technique will be in \u2013 hold your breath \u2013 algae fuels.<\/p>\n<p>Exxon Mobil entered into a partnership with  Craig Venter\u2019s Synthetic Genomics (SGI) in mid 2009 in order to explore applying  SGI expertise in genetic engineering to create algae that can produce biofuels  on a large scale, in an economically sustainable manner.<\/p>\n<p>While ExxonMobil brings in the engineering  expertise and tons of money, SGI brings in the genetic engineering knowledge.  Exxon Mobil had committed to invest over $600 million in this effort to make  sustainable algae fuels a reality.<\/p>\n<p>Now you can well understand why all of us here  at algae have been burning our midnight oil last one week over Craig Venter\u2019s  work. Well, we have been following Craig Venter since the time Exxon Mobil  invested in his company, but his recent achievement added an extra level of  importance to his work for all of us at Oilgae.<\/p>\n<p>I hence thought that I\u2019d dedicate this issue of  the newsletter to providing inputs and perspectives on Craig Venter\u2019s work and  how it could influence algae fuel research.<\/p>\n<p>The following are the sections in this detailed  article:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Background of Craig Venter and his recently breakthrough.<\/li>\n<li>Critical challenges in algae fuels<\/li>\n<li>How genetic engineering could help overcome these challenges<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Craig Venter \u2013 Background and Recent  Breakthrough<\/h3>\n<p>John Craig Venter is an American biologist and entrepreneur, most well-known  until recently for his role in being the (joint) first to sequence the human  genome. Two weeks back, he became equally famous for booting up the first living  cell with a synthetic genome.<\/p>\n<p>Venter has been a founder of companies\/organizations such as Celera Genomics,  The Institute for Genomic Research, the J. Craig Venter Institute and Synthetic  Genomics. He was listed on Time magazine&#8217;s 2007 and 2008 Time 100 list of the  most influential people in the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>His work on human genome<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Craig Venter isn&#8217;t exactly your idea of a normal human being. Far from it.  While working on the project to map the human genome, Craig Venter believed that  the maverick approach of shotgun sequencing (rather than a classical long-winded  approach) was the fastest and most effective way to get useful human genome  data. The method was controversial since some geneticists felt it would not be  accurate enough for a genome as complicated as the human.<\/p>\n<p>With funding from the private sector, Venter founded Celera Genomics, whose  goal was to sequence the entire human genome and release it into the public  domain for non-commercial use in much less time and for much less cost than the  public human genome project. DNA from five demographically different individuals  was used by Celera to generate the sequence of the human genome, one of them  being Venter himself!<\/p>\n<p>In 2000, Venter and Francis Collins of the National Institutes of Health and  U.S. Public Genome Project jointly made the announcement of the mapping of the  human genome. Despite some claims that shotgun sequencing was in some ways less  accurate than the clone-by-clone method chosen by the Human Genome Project, the  technique became widely accepted by the scientific community and is still used  today.<\/p>\n<p>After the human genome project, Venter founded &#8211; and is the president of &#8211;  the J. Craig Venter Institute, which conducts research in synthetic biology. In  June 2005, he co-founded Synthetic Genomics, a firm dedicated to using modified  microorganisms to produce clean fuels and biochemicals.<\/p>\n<p><em>The first synthetic life form<\/em><\/p>\n<p>In May 2010, a team of scientists led by Venter  became the first to successfully create what was described as &#8220;synthetic  life&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Craig Venter and his team had succeeded in building the genome of a bacterium  from scratch and had incorporated it into a cell to make what they called the  world&#8217;s &#8220;first synthetic life form.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>How exactly did they do this?<\/p>\n<p>In a decade-long work, Venter and his researchers first mapped the genome of  a simple bacteria, Mycoplasma mycoides. A genome is the &#8216;brain&#8217; and control  center of a cell, and contains sequences of DNA which carry all the genetic  information needed for the cell \u2014 and by extension, the organism \u2014 to function.  Genomes, like all other living matter, are made of chemical compounds.<\/p>\n<p>Once the genome was mapped, Venter\u2019s team manufactured the M. mycoides&#8217;  genome in the lab, using chemicals. This synthetic genome was identical to the  &#8216;original&#8217; except for certain harmless &#8216;signatures&#8217; the team put in to identify  it as synthetic. The synthetic genome was then inserted into another type of  bacteria after the bacteria&#8217;s own genome had been taken out.<\/p>\n<p>Voila! As soon as the synthetic genome was inserted into the genomeless cell,  it started making new proteins encoded in its DNA and converted it into a new  synthetic species. That is, the cell was able to understand the synthetic genome  and started &#8220;working with it&#8221;. According to Craig Venter, the cell has  replicated over a billion times, and the only DNA that the cell has now is the  synthetic one that Venter\u2019s team made. Exciting stuff!<\/p>\n<p>(For trivia buffs, the new organism has been nicknamed Synthia, and the  <em>Mycoplasma mycoides<\/em> bacterium causes mastitis in goats.)<\/p>\n<p>Is this really an example of synthetic life? Not everyone agrees. For  instance there are some who &#8211; in my opinion, correctly &#8211; point out that Craig  Venter did not create a live cell, he only created an artificial part of the  cell which integrated itself nicely with the existing cell. And then there are  others who say that the synthetic cell achievement does not fully demystify  life&#8217;s underlying code, the genome. They claim that the researchers built much  of the bacterium&#8217;s genome without fully understanding the function of many of  the million-plus base pairs involved. About half of the genes, in fact, are  still &#8220;a complete black box,&#8221; said Richard Roberts of New England Biolabs, Inc.,  in a commentary after Venter&#8217;s talk. (Source: <a href=\"http:\/\/bit.ly\/ahSN4Z\">http:\/\/bit.ly\/ahSN4Z<\/a>). In order words, some of  these experts feel that it is a fairly dumb reconstruction of an existing  design, with no clue of what the components of the design mean.<\/p>\n<p>They might have a point after all. In an earlier instance, when the team had  got just one piece out of the millions of pieces wrong, the genome simply did  not work. And well, this also does not mean that the team has the ability to  create a genome that is original. In fact, some experts feel that the technical  expertise and understanding required to create an entire, original cell might  take a long, long time \u2013 long after you and I are dead and gone.<\/p>\n<p>Leaving aside these technical points, a more pertinent question for us at  Oilgae is: Whether or not this event qualifies as a \u201csynthetic life creating  event\u201d, what consequences does it hold for the future of algae fuels? If  scientists do not fully understand what component of genome does what but only  have a \u201cblack box\u201d understanding, isn\u2019t their capability restricted to simply  making copies of existing genomes without being able to create absolutely  original ones? If that is indeed so, and all they do is to \u201csynthetically\u201d  produce a genome that already exists in some other algal strain, isn\u2019t it easy  to simply \u201cextract\u201d the genome from that desired strain than painstakingly  create it in the lab? Put another way, is this experiment by Venter only of  academic interest or does it make a practical difference?<\/p>\n<p>I had a lengthy discussion on this with my biotech team-mates, and they  assured me that this event can make a practical difference.<\/p>\n<p>A bit of reading helped me to identify the following advantages that  synthetic genes have over their natural counterparts:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>They are obtained more quickly and less expensively than conventionally  cloned genes<\/li>\n<li>They are simple to modify in order to facilitate downstream manipulations<\/li>\n<li>Any sequence you wish is possible.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>To illustrate the advantages mentioned above, just because scientists have  identified a desired genome in an algal strain does not mean that they will be  able to extract the natural genome exactly the way they would wish to. Under  such circumstances, it is worth creating the genome artificially because you can  get it exactly the way you want it. Such control alone, my colleagues pointed  out, could make an enormous difference.<\/p>\n<p>Interesting indeed. So, I asked myself, in what specific aspects could  genetic engineering, armed with this added capability to create synthetic  genomes, influence algae biofuels? In order to answer this question, I first  started with the critical challenges faced by the algae fuels industry.<\/p>\n<h3>Critical challenges in algae fuels<\/h3>\n<p>While a number of hurdles stand in the way of sustainable algae fuels, the  following are, in my opinion, the key hurdles:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It is difficult to selecting a suitable algae strain\/species with high  productivity and oil content, which can also grow well in specific environments.<\/li>\n<li>High cost of cultivation. This includes costs for mixing, CO2 (if sourced  from outside), aeration, nutrients, labour and other general maintenance costs,  and amortized capital costs.<\/li>\n<li>High cost of harvesting algae from the growth medium<\/li>\n<li>High costs for drying.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Some of you might point out that there are  challenges in oil extraction (owing to the tough cell walls) as well as in  transesterification (owing to the high FFA content), but I reckon these are not  as critical and difficult as the ones noted above.<\/p>\n<h3>When genetic engineering meets the algae fuel  challenges\u2026<\/h3>\n<p>Let\u2019s look at each of the challenges and explore how genetic engineering  could help overcome the challenge.<\/p>\n<p><em>\u201cCreating\u201d optimal algae strains<\/em><\/p>\n<p>This will probably be the area where SGI\u2019s expertise will be required most.  Can Venter create, using his demonstrated skills in genetic engineering,  synthetic algae strains:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>with high lipid content <em>that<\/em><\/li>\n<li>exhibit much higher productivities \/ yields, <em>while<\/em><\/li>\n<li>being immune to contamination from other elements, <em>and <\/em><\/li>\n<li>at the same time are tolerant of specific environments?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This is a trillion dollar question. I\u2019d bet my entire wealth (sadly, not a  lot) that this where Venter will put in most of his research resources.<\/p>\n<p>My colleagues tell me that there\u2019s a good amount of understanding already  existing about the genomes responsible for high lipid content and for providing  immunity to contamination, which will make these aspects even more interesting  to Venter.<\/p>\n<p>The other aspect mentioned earlier \u2013 higher yields \u2013 could be another  low-hanging fruit, with considerable research likely having taken place already  on genomes responsible for growth rates.<\/p>\n<p>Environment tolerance is an area familiar to genetic engineering  professionals. Thus, expect quick progress to be made on this aspect. Here, the  efforts will be to use GM to produce strains that can grow well under existing  temperatures, pH and other medium factors such as salinity.<\/p>\n<p>An interesting idea came from my colleague Mathumitha Balu, who pointed out  that GM could also enable mixotropic cultivation, where multiple algae strains  are cultivated in the same medium. Mixotropic cultivation could be preferred in  some cases because it is the natural form of algae growth in those environments  \u2013 this is true especially where algae are grown in open systems. One of the  hurdles to mixotropic cultivation currently is that the chemical compounds  released by one strain could be \u201ctoxic\u201d to the other strain\/s. If, through GM,  one were able to prevent the \u201ctoxin\u201d being released, the possibility of  mixotropic cultivation becomes enhanced to that extent.<\/p>\n<p><em>In sum<\/em>, expect a good amount of of those $600 million pumped in by  Exxon Mobil to go into algae strain research using genetic tools.<\/p>\n<p><em>Lowering the cost of cultivation<\/em><\/p>\n<p>To a certain extent, the challenge of high cultivation cost can be taken care  of if an optimal strain is chosen with high productivities, oil content, high  environmental tolerance and resistance to contamination. Thus, GM plays a role  here.<\/p>\n<p>There\u2019s another interesting aspect to consider \u2013 water. The amount of water  required for algae cultivation is large. (Still, I see few people really  factoring in the criticality of water, or attaching a cost to it in their  calculations.) Thankfully, one way by which water can indeed be obtained free of  cost is by using sea water. But you need specific strains of algae (such as  those belonging to the Nannochloropsis species) for marine water, and these  strains might not necessarily have all the desired characteristics. What if  highly desirable strains were genetically modified so they could thrive in  marine water? Success in such an effort will go a long way in lowering the cost  of cultivation, while at the same making large-scale algae cultivation that much  more feasible.<\/p>\n<p>I however feel that there is a limit upto which biotechnology plays a role in  influencing cultivation costs. Cultivation costs also to a significant extent  depend on the cost of construction and maintenance of open ponds or  photobioreactors, cost of equipments used for mixing and aeration etc. These are  areas where engineering technology, rather than biotechnology, plays an  important role.<\/p>\n<p><em>Inference:<\/em> Both engineering technology and genetic technology will be  needed to lower the costs of cultivation.<\/p>\n<p><em>High cost of harvesting<\/em><\/p>\n<p>In the case of microalgae cultivation, harvesting can add to the costs  significantly, contributing as much as 20% of the total cost of production. Even  if one were to use fairly simple belt filters for harvesting, the costs can be  as high as $75-100 per T of dry algal biomass.<\/p>\n<p>On the face of it, harvesting really looks like an engineering problem where  Exxon\u2019s skills will be more in need than SGI\u2019s genetic engineering skills. But  there are creative concepts that could indeed bring genetic engineering skills  into play.<\/p>\n<p>Let\u2019s consider autoflocculation, a phenomenon in which algae clump together  on their own to form a thick mass that can harvested easily, at much lower costs  than otherwise. Even today, in nature, there are some algae that autoflocculate;  however, these strains have little or no oil. What if genetic engineering  methods are used to make high oil bearing algae to get the characteristic of  autoflocculation? You get the idea\u2026<\/p>\n<p><em>However,<\/em> expect biotechnology \/ genetic engineering to play only a  minor role here.<\/p>\n<p><em>High costs of drying<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Drying appears to be such an innocent little thing, you wouldn\u2019t think its  cost could amount to anything. You couldn\u2019t be more wrong. Based on the  calculations done by the Oilgae team, drying alone could cost upwards of $2 per  gallon of algae biodiesel, if we use the traditionally used dryers such as spray  dryers. It is likely that a more efficient drying system specifically adapted  for making dry biomass for fuel could cost less, but even if one were to assume  an 80% reduction, to $0.5 per gallon, the cost is still high!<\/p>\n<p>Trust me, reducing the costs of drying could be a far more critical concern  than what we all have assumed so far. Can genetic engineering play any role  here?<\/p>\n<p>Well, this was a toughie. I had almost given up trying to find a way where GM  could play a role in more efficient drying when my colleague Parkavi Kumar  pointed out to what OriginOil claims to be doing \u2013 bypassing the entire drying  step (or for that matter, harvesting step), by extracting oil from the algae  without killing the cells ( <a href=\"http:\/\/www.originoil.com\/technology\/live-extraction.html\">http:\/\/www.originoil.com\/technology\/live-extraction.html<\/a> ). Wouldn\u2019t it be possible for genetic engineering to evolve algae that have  cells less tough than normal so that such a \u201clive extraction\u201d becomes easier?  Why not, I exclaimed, why not indeed \u2013 after all, we are talking about  theoretical possibilities here!<\/p>\n<p><em>So what do I think?<\/em> Methinks that GM is unlikely to play any role  here, unless we wish to get a bit fanciful.<\/p>\n<h3>Summary<\/h3>\n<p>Based on the research and brainstorming the Oilgae team did over the past one  week on the impact of genetic engineering and Craig Venter\u2019s recent breakthrough  in \u201ccreating synthetic life\u201d, it appears that Venter, with his expertise (and  with a dose of imagination) could indeed influence algae fuel production by  being able to address critical challenges along many points in the production  value chain. The influence of genetic engineering will be highest in strain  selection and cultivation, but they could play a role in making cost-effective  harvesting and drying a reality as well.<\/p>\n<p>A related question is of course how quickly could Venter&#8217;s expertise overcome  the challenges. Perhaps we will have some indications from him soon. Some  statements jointly made by him and Exxon Mobil last year (at the time of their  partnership agreement) suggested that it could take upwards of five years. Let\u2019s  hope his latest achievement shortens this.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The last ten days have been hectic for those in the genetic engineering field. Synthetic life has been created, scream the headlines, and well, it is no hoax, at least not entirely. The man at the center of it all, Craig Venter, is no stranger to those in the field of biotech, having been associated [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,58],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1884","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-algae-fuel-research","category-genetic-engineering"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1884","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1884"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1884\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1885,"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1884\/revisions\/1885"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1884"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1884"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.oilgae.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1884"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}